SAF Sues Chicago Over Gun Range Prohibition on 1A, 2A GroundsCHICAGO, Aug. 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) today filed a lawsuit in federal court against the City of Chicago's new gun ordinance, asserting that "by banning gun ranges open to the public…under color of law," the city is depriving citizens of their right to keep and bear arms in violation of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Joining SAF in this lawsuit are the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA), Action Target, Inc., and three individual plaintiffs including a retired Chicago police detective. They are represented by attorneys Alan Gura of Virginia and David Sigale of Chicago, who teamed up with SAF and ISRA on the landmark case of McDonald v. City of Chicago, which incorporated the Second Amendment to the states, effectively striking down Chicago's 28-year-old handgun ban.

"While the city has adopted new regulations that make it legal to own handguns," said SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, "they have crafted this new ordinance to make it virtually impossible for prospective gun owners to meet all legal requirements unless they travel outside the city for mandatory training. The new ordinance prohibits public gun ranges inside the city yet the city demands that handgun owners get at least one hour of range training time.

"This is a 'Catch-22' scenario," he continued, "that seems deliberately designed to discourage Chicago residents from exercising their firearm civil rights barely two months after those rights were restored by the Supreme Court."

Individual plaintiffs are Rhonda Ezell, a victim of three attempted burglaries who has disabilities making it difficult for her to travel outside the city; Joseph Brown, a WWII U.S. Army veteran who was among the liberators of the infamous Dachau concentration camp, and William Hespen, a retired police detective, all of whom must qualify for Chicago Firearms Permits.

Action Target, a Utah-based company, builds shooting ranges and manufactures gun range equipment and supplies. It has a long history of providing gun safety equipment and training, and has previously built law enforcement shooting ranges in Chicago. However, Action Target is prohibited from building a public target range within the city's limits under the restrictions of the new gun ordinance.

Randy Graham, vice president of Action Target, said, "We believe that citizens have a constitutional right to use and train with firearms in a safe and controlled environment. As a leader in the firearms training industry, Action Target is committed to standing up for these rights."

"By banning public gun ranges," Gottlieb said, "and by banning the loan and rental of firearms at such ranges, Chicago is acting under color of law to deprive citizens of their right to keep and bear arms, and to conveniently receive the education required under the ordinance that is necessary to obtain a Chicago Firearms Permit. The city is violating both the Second and First amendments, and we are asking the court to put an end to this nonsense."

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

On September 24, the mobile gun range is supposed to roll in to serve the good people of Chicago. When it does, I will enjoy driving into Chicago from the 'burbs ... bringing guns ... and will I will enjoy the mobile range and the spectacle of it all. It will smell like... Victory.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTAlthough Plaintiffs maintain that a complete and total gun range ban violates the core of the Second Amendment right, obviating the need to locate a standard of review, Plaintiffs would nonetheless prevail under the intermediate scrutiny standard referenced by the Court. Quite simply, there is no substantial government interest in banning gun ranges, let alone any such interest. To the contrary, the city concedes that range training is required for public safety.

A gun range becomes unusually dangerous if one runs into the line of fire, but that is also true of vehicular traffic.

On September 24, the mobile gun range is supposed to roll in to serve the good people of Chicago.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTAlthough Plaintiffs maintain that a complete and total gun range ban violates the core of the Second Amendment right, obviating the need to locate a standard of review, Plaintiffs would nonetheless prevail under the intermediate scrutiny standard referenced by the Court. Quite simply, there is no substantial government interest in banning gun ranges, let alone any such interest. To the contrary, the city concedes that range training is required for public safety.

A gun range becomes unusually dangerous if one runs into the line of fire, but that is also true of vehicular traffic.

LOL !!

This is incredible!

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men [and women] stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

--George Orwell

-- Certified something-or-other by various organizations and governmental entities.

Hi Federal Farmer. Wouldn't it be fun to have a big show of people from inside and outside Chicago to use the mobile range when it arrives on September 24 ? I live near the city and work in the Loop. I would bring some Chicago-legal 12-round-maximum pistols and revolvers for some good-ole' American fun. I guarantee I would be there. With enough people using the range, we could get TV reporting of the event too. How's that?

Hi Federal Farmer. Wouldn't it be fun to have a big show of people from inside and outside Chicago to use the mobile range when it arrives on September 24 ? I live near the city and work in the Loop. I'll bring some Chicago-legal 10-round pistols and revolvers for some good-ole' American fun. With enough people using the range, we could get TV reporting of the event too. How's that?

I'd rather get donations and grants to subsidize low-income Chicagoan's use of the range to acquire their CFPs and have the range booked all day every day.

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men [and women] stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

--George Orwell

-- Certified something-or-other by various organizations and governmental entities.

Hi Federal Farmer. Wouldn't it be fun to have a big show of people from inside and outside Chicago to use the mobile range when it arrives on September 24 ? I live near the city and work in the Loop. I'll bring some Chicago-legal 10-round pistols and revolvers for some good-ole' American fun. With enough people using the range, we could get TV reporting of the event too. How's that?

I'd rather get donations and grants to subsidize low-income Chicagoan's use of the range to acquire their CFPs and have the range booked all day every day.

FF, it's not either-or, right? Maybe both could be accomplished together. A few dollars and a little time... and a few volunteers is all it would take.

Updates posted on Calguns indicate that the judge deliberated the motion for a preliminary injunction yesterday (10/5/10).

Got a report from the scene.

1. Judge is skeptical that we have irreparable injury (which is one of the four key things you have to have to win a Preliminary Injunction.) It's very clear in 1A case law that a law that violates a fundamental right is by definition an irreparable injury, but the Judge here seems skeptical.

2. However, she buys none of Chicago's arguments and all but laughed at their defense of their law. As such, on the merits it appears she agrees that Chicago can not ban ranges while requiring them to own a handgun in Chicago.

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

Since things seem to be heating up I'm providing links to the Complaint and Motion for Premliminary Injunction, and a pdf of today's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint (credit to Calguns for this last one):

Attached Files

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

Seems like plaintiffs failed to demonstrate the 'chilling effect' of banning ranges and any evidence of the 1000s of residents unable to get their CFP in a timely fashion because of the fact that most gun owners in Chicago have chosen to ignore the process entirely.

However, fear of being exposed as violating the gun ownership ban by expressing their desire but inability to acquire a CFP is, in fact, chilling lawful gun ownership.

I wonder why the mere fact that there is over 100,000 FOID (Firearm Owner ID) cards registered to Chicago residents and there is no way for 100,000 people to acquire the necessary training in the time alotted. Also, since there are only 100s of people who have acquired the CFP, there must therefore be 99,900 people who are now in violation, assuming they all own guns.

I know of individuals who have abandoned their previously registered guns because the new process was too intrusive.

It is a likely fact that, post-McDonald, there are now fewer lawful gun owners in Chicago than there were before.

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men [and women] stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

--George Orwell

-- Certified something-or-other by various organizations and governmental entities.

Discussion of the evidence and ruling here. This isn't a final disposition by any means. A lot of test cases do get disposed of at the prelim injunction stage, but the judge rules that this is not one of those. To get a preliminary injunction, which would bar enforcement of the statute during the time while trial is pending, a party must show that they are likely (tho not sure) to win, and also that they will suffer irreparable harm if made to wait for trial, plus two other things. Otherwise, the usual rule of you win after trial and not before applies.

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

I'm still reading, but it has some very interesting points being made regarding "bearing" arms outside of the home (starting on page 37). The argument against the shooting range ban is rather good as well.

[quote]Although Plaintiffs maintain that the Second Amendment preserves pre-existing rights rather than “creates” them, the basic idea—that the Second Amendment is not limited to the home—is incontrovertible. Although Heller does not require invalidating all laws regulating guns in public, “Heller does not preclude Second Amendment challenges to laws regulating firearm possession outside of home.” Peruta v. County of San Diego, 678 F. Supp. 2d 1046, 1051 (S.D. Cal. 2010).[/quote]

[quote]Indeed, the Supreme Court was all but forced to declare the Second Amendment applies outside the home, given the way in which the District of Columbia litigated its case...The Supreme Court was required to address this argument to reach its judgment, and rejected it. “At the time of the founding, as now, to ‘bear’ meant to ‘carry.’” Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2793 (citations omitted).

To “bear arms,” as used in the Second Amendment, is to “wear, bear, or carry . . . upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.” Id. (quoting Muscarello v. United States, 524 U.S. 125, 143 (1998) (Ginsburg, J., dissenting)); BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY 214 (6th Ed. 1998)); see also Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2804 (“the Second Amendment right, protecting only individuals’ liberty to keep and carry arms . . .”), at 2817 (“the right to keep and carry arms”) (emphasis added). “ear arms means . . . simply the carrying of arms . . .” Heller, at 2796.[/quote]

And the bell ringer

[quote]Having defined the Second Amendment’s language as including a right to “carry” guns for self-defense, the Supreme Court helpfully noted several exceptions that prove the rule. Explaining that this right is “not unlimited,” in that there is no right to “carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose,” Id. at 2816 (citations omitted), the Court confirmed that there is a right to carry at least some weapons, in some manner, for some purpose. The Court then listed as “presumptively lawful,” id., at 2817 n.26, “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places,” id., at 2817, confirming both that such “presumptions” may be overcome in appropriate circumstances, [b]and that carrying bans are not presumptively lawful in non-sensitive places.[/quote]

A final 'zinger' in regards to carry?

[quote]Because the challenged laws forbid the exercise of protected activity, without more, they must be struck down. See Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2818 (Functional firearm ban “makes it impossible for citizens to use [firearms] for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.”). But even if the case is governed by some standard of review— any standard of review—the outcome is the same.[/quote]

I really like this next quote, because I see it as being a clear response to the argument against RTC here in Illinois. In the end it does not matter what Madigan (either one), Cullerton, Quinn, or anybody else in an elected position in Illinois opines. Bearing arms for the fundamental right of self defense is a constitutionally protected right.

[quote]It nonetheless merits mention that a “right” entitles individuals to do something, and is not dependent on the graces of the government. The notion that the government may ban outright whatever it finds too difficult to regulate is not a constitutional doctrine.[/quote]

To everybody involved - FANTASTIC JOB. You are laying the groundwork. Thank you.

Attached Files

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

This is one of the reasons I like Alan Gura ... and have reservations about many of the cases being brought on 2nd Amendment grounds. Doing this right ... building 2nd amendment jurisprudence ... is going to take time. Lots of time. Not because it should but because that is how the system works.

This is one of the reasons I like Alan Gura ... and have reservations about many of the cases being brought on 2nd Amendment grounds. Doing this right ... building 2nd amendment jurisprudence ... is going to take time. Lots of time. Not because it should but because that is how the system works.

You Must Get Gun Range Training. But You Can’t Get Gun Range Training.Shaping the future of the Second Amendment in post-McDonald ChicagoBrian Doherty | December 9, 2010 Reason Magazine

There is some amusing and sharp commentary from in article Basically it sounds like a circle jerk between the zoning commissioner and the judge, with zero regard for reason, evidence, or law. I'm glad the author is bringing the issue of zoning to light too - because almost everybody else focuses entirely on the complete ban. And when (yes when) the city loses this case, they're going to zone it into impossibility while everyone else washes their hands and walks away, saying they've complied and the matter is settled.

Chicago zoning commissioner Pattie Scudiero, while admitting she’s never even seen a gun range

...

She also admitted that, as far as she knew, no one had ever complained about the existing government ranges, but somehow she knew public ones would be a huge problem.

...

Scudiero’s mere assertion was enough for [Judge] Kendall to claim the city had “presented sufficient evidence to meet its burden under this standard that its objective is an important one and that its objective is advanced by means substantially related to that objective.”

. . . But gun advocates argue that the ban on ranges is more like a de facto ban on guns altogether since it is a strong disincentive for residents to pursue legal gun ownership.

When contacted by The Daily Caller, a spokesperson for IllinoisCarry – an organization dedicated to securing the right to conceal carry – said, “The fact that training is required but ranges where that training can take place are banned in the city is an outright ploy to deny folks the right to protect themselves.”

The spokesperson went on to point out that the state of Illinois is the only state in the nation that has no provision on the books for lawfully carrying a handgun. “One only has to look at the rest of the nation and see that Chicago is out of step,” she added.

The spokesperson went on to point out that the state of Illinois is the only state in the nation that has no provision on the books for lawfully carrying a handgun. “One only has to look at the rest of the nation and see that Chicago is out of step,” she added.

Good to see this in the mainstream media. It's so rare to see anyone but firearms enthusiasts acknowledge this. Glad to see the reporter included it. Great work!

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

We reverse. The court’s decision turned on several legal errors. To be fair, the standards for evaluating Second Amendment claims are just emerging, and this type of litigation is quite new. Still, the judge’s deci‐ sion reflects misunderstandings about the nature of the plaintiffs’ harm, the structure of this kind of constitutional claim, and the proper decision method for evaluating alleged infringements of Second Amendment rights. On the present record, the plaintiffs are entitled to a preliminary injunction against the firing‐range ban. The harm to their Second Amendment rights cannot be remedied by damages, their challenge has a strong likelihood of success on the merits, and the City’s claimed harm to the public interest is based entirely on speculation.